On Mrs Pitt and others ...

[craigowl]

Originally Posted by Veronica Hull

Now that will make very interesting reading Norma. Information from these ladies is absolutely priceless, so thank you for getting a comment from Katie, I for one will be very interested in her views.
Veronica

Gordon and I have been lucky enough to have met Katie in Canada and spoken to her at length and we have continued to correspond since. As Veronica and Dennis stated, she is amazing for her advancing years. She still shows, would you believe? So I was pleased for her to allow me to share with you her reminiscences on a subject that has become topical, but unfortunately not always accurate.
Norma

LOOKING BACK by Katie Eldred

There was no question of "inventing" litters to create a registry. Until 1945 Cavalier-type dogs and litters were registered on the King Charles Spaniel Register. The Cavalier Register didn't come into existence until after the Kennel Club agreed to separate the two breeds in 1945, at which time Amice as President and I as Secretary of the CKCS Club, plus Mme.Harper Trois Fontaines (whom Amice asked to help as she had been responsible for most of the breeding that took place during the War years, when everyone else was otherwise engaged) spent an entire day at the offices in Clarges Street, picking out of the Charlie registers the names of all the dogs and bitches that we knew were Cavalier type, or that we knew sired or produced the long-nose type. The Cavalier King Charles Spaniel Register was formed from the list we produced that day. We were permitted, for sometime - can't remember when the stud book was closed permanently - to breed back into Charlies, and I know my sister, Daphne Murray (Crustadele) did that at least once. The progeny of such a breeding was registered as (I think) a Cross and then by breeding bred back to a Cavalier for two generations the final result could be registered as a "true" Cavalier.

Yes, a lot of people did think Ann's Son's sire might have been a Papillon, as Miss Mostyn Walker did breed them as well as Charlies. But I don't think she was ever challenged about this, so it never really became public information.

Plantation Banjo, a black & tan, was by Plantation Robert, a black & tan, out of Plantation Twinkles, a black & tan. He was therefore NOT a son of Freckles of Ttiweh as has been suggested. Re the seven litters from Freckles. I am doing a bit of research via other contacts and will let you know if I get any results. Of course, the Kennel Club Stud Book entries in those days were made by hand, and I'm sure the people who made those entries were not infallible and mistakes were made. But I would like to stress that although Amice Pitt’s affix was on Freckles, there is no way she would have bred a bitch SEVEN times, let alone to the same dog and/or in the space of six years.

Yes, my Belinda was put down at about 8 years of age because of a heart attack. She was bred twice, once to the ruby, Cannonhill Richey and once to the tri, Bouncer Rupert, whose sire was Plantation Gilbert, a black & tan full brother to Cannonhill Richey. The second litter, to Rupert, produced Ch.Little Dorrit of Ttiweh (who started life as Lady Jane of Turnworth but Amice changed it), who was the dam of Ch.Harmony of Ttiweh, Ch.Jupiter of Ttiweh and Mars of Ttiweh, all very influential sires in the breed. The
first litter to Richey produced Cinderella of Turnworth, who went to Daphne who, in turn, bred her to Bouncer Rupert and that produced Fickle of Ttiweh. Fickle was bred to Ch.Hillbarn Alexander of Ttiweh, whose sire was Ch.Daywell Roger, himself sired by Cannonhill Richey. Fickle and Alexander produced Ch.Raoul of Ttiweh, who was bred in 1953 to Victoria of Burgercroft, whose grandfather on her dam's side was James of Turnworth, full sister to Little Dorrit.

As far as hearts are concerned, let's not forget that vets were few and far between in England in those days - in fact, where I lived there was no vet within reasonable reach. As for a heart specialist - well, forget it. They didn't exist. And of course vets didn't have access to (or knowledge of) anything like the drugs and stuff available to them nowadays.

I do remember that Amice was worried, after the war, about how narrow the gene pool was. However, I can't remember the (comparatively few) breeders of the time being especially panicked about that narrowness of the gene pool. Looking back now, of course we should have been, though what exactly we should have done about it, I don't know.There were lots of dogs that were overused and, I'm sure, lots that were underused. But we were, after all, trying to create a breed (or revive an old one) so why would we use poorer samples of the breed just to widen the gene pool ? Perhaps we should have done. Hindsight is great.
But in any case, I don't think any of us for one moment anticipated
the incredible future popularity of the breed.

Katie Eldred

[Murphy]

Thank you Norma and Thank you Katy. We are most grateful to you both. Wonderful to have accurate information from source!
Elspeth

I'll second that!

[Sins]

How marvellous to be able to read her thoughts on the topic.Thanks Norma.
I must say I'm looking forward to Dennis and Tina's book even more now.
Sins

[Jenny Howden, Australia]

Thank you to Katie and Norma - this is all very interesting and I am soooo pleased that you have taken the trouble to write this for us

Norma ... of course you do realise that Katie wrote all this to Bet in 2001, don't you? (TIC)